RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,779
Posts: 5,434,569
Members: 24,841
Currently online: 486
Newest member: annieslc

TrekToday headlines

Trek Comics Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

German Volkswagen Campaign Features Trek Actors
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

Shatner And Nimoy In Trek 3?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

The Art of John Alvin Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 23

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 3 2013, 07:14 AM   #16
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

doubleohfive wrote: View Post
The thing every last person on this godforsaken message board needs to have reminded to them is that this is a tiny community of fandom. A small pond of fans in a ginormous ocean of moviegoers. What we want, what we care about doesn't mean jack shit. To assume, nay expect otherwise is foolish.
This is not a godforsaken message board! There is no god! There was no forsaking!

Why you mad bro?
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 07:18 AM   #17
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

So this is how it might have played out if they announced Khan as the villain?

Press Release: "Khan will be in the next film."
Fans and Audiences: "Well, guess I'm not gonna bother seeing that one."

MakeshiftPython is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 07:46 AM   #18
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: Hollywood, CA
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to doubleohfive
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

Also: For those who actually care about context, here's the entire interview. (scroll down to the embedded video)

http://www.pajiba.com/trade_news/jj-...t-sherlock.php
doubleohfive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 07:48 AM   #19
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

I enjoyed my little surprise in the cinema. I'm glad they didn't reveal it.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 07:56 AM   #20
AllStarEntprise
Fleet Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

doubleohfive wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/1...=entertainment

"The truth is I think it probably would have been smarter just to say upfront 'This is who it is.' It was only trying to preserve the fun of it, and it might have given more time to acclimate and accept that’s what the thing was," Abrams said. "The truth is because it was so important to the studio that we not angle this thing for existing fans. If we said it was Khan, it would feel like you’ve really got to know what ‘Star Trek’ is about to see this movie. That would have been limiting. I can understand their argument to try to keep that quiet, but I do wonder if it would have seemed a little bit less like an attempt at deception if we had just come out with it."

I bolded what i think is the important text of this quote.

I'm not surprised by Paramount snubbing existing fans but was it really smart to not hype up Trek's most iconic villain? I mean it's not like we're expecting non-fans to watch 2 dozen episodes to understand Khan's character or history.
I don't see anything in Abrams' comments to indicate Paramount was "snubbing" any existing fans. Rather, the obvious read (obvious, if you don't have an anti-Abrams agenda, I suppose, or if you just learned how to use context clues in elementary school) would be that Paramount didn't want to promote the film as something that only fans with a vested interest in Star Trek would be able to enjoy.

Announcing that Khan was the villain in the film would have proclaimed precisely that and anyone who had ever heard of Star Trek or had a passing familiarity with it would know 'Eh, more of the same stuff, why should I go see it?'

So instead, Paramount chose to angle their promotion of the film omitting that little tidbit. There's nothing wrong with that. It makes pefect sense that Paramount would want as many butts in the theaters and as many eyeballs on those screens because means the picture is selling tickets. Why this is such a complex issue to comprehend is beyond me.

The thing every last person on this godforsaken message board needs to have reminded to them is that this is a tiny community of fandom. A small pond of fans in a ginormous ocean of moviegoers. What we want, what we care about doesn't mean jack shit. To assume, nay expect otherwise is foolish.
I don't have an anti-Abrams agenda. I enjoy both his Trek movies, MI3, Cloverfield, Super 8 and Fringe. I was trying to articulate (maybe snubbing wasn't the right word) that trying to keep the villain's identity a secret when it's one the fans know; was a silly idea. The Klingons were added into STID for no other reason than to be fodder for Khan to beat up. And yet Paramount had no reservations about them being put in the film or stating they would be in the film prior to it's release. How many general audience attendees do you think can even describe what a klingon is? There was no expectation for general audiences to go watch all 79 episodes of TOS, and the original 6 movies prior ST09 release. Khan is not some untranslatable villain. He's Star Trek's most iconic villain from what is still perceived as the best film in the franchise. Why not promote that?

Take Star Wars for example. If Disney decided to revive Darth Vader for episode 7. Do you think they would keep that in their pocket till the film was released or promote the hell out the fact that Darth Vader is returning?
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 08:15 AM   #21
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
Khan is not some untranslatable villain. He's Star Trek's most iconic villain from what is still perceived as the best film in the franchise. Why not promote that?
Perhaps because they already felt that tons of people would see the film anyway based on the success of the previous one, that they decided to keep Khan a secret to actually, you know, have some fun with it

Take Star Wars for example. If Disney decided to revive Darth Vader for episode 7. Do you think they would keep that in their pocket till the film was released or promote the hell out the fact that Darth Vader is returning?
That's a good question. I suppose it would be the same situation as above: Would they feel that because it's a new SW movie, that that would be enough to get millions of asses in theater seats, or would they need a carrot on a stick to lure them there?
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 08:55 AM   #22
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

doubleohfive wrote: View Post
Also: For those who actually care about context, here's the entire interview. (scroll down to the embedded video)

http://www.pajiba.com/trade_news/jj-...t-sherlock.php
This bit (perhaps reworded to read "For those who'd like to see Abrams' statement in context... ") would have been a good fit in your previous post, in place of the "(obvious, if you don't have an anti-Abrams agenda, I suppose, or if you just learned how to use context clues in elementary school)" part, which wasn't at all essential to the point.
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 09:16 AM   #23
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

After looking over the box office returns again, I can't really see any reasonable way to regard decisions on how STID was marketed as mistakes, if by a "mistake" one means something that hurt the bottom line. If STID had been a failure or only a marginal success, then second-guessing or Monday morning quarterbacking the marketing campaign might be in order. But given that STID was a success, how one could validly argue that the returns would have been better, if only someone in marketing had done thus and so, is really a mystery to me.

Tosk wrote: View Post
They just shouldn't have done Khan in the first place.
This is by far a more respectable position than getting bent out of shape about how the film was marketed.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 09:44 AM   #24
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
After looking over the box office returns again, I can't really see any reasonable way to regard decisions on how STID was marketed as mistakes, if by a "mistake" one means something that hurt the bottom line. If STID had been a failure or only a marginal success, then second-guessing or Monday morning quarterbacking the marketing campaign might be in order. But given that STID was a success, how one could validly argue that the returns would have been better, if only someone in marketing had done thus and so, is really a mystery to me.
Likely because as good as STID did, it didn't do as well as many expected it to as a follow up. It did less domestically than the 2009 film, despite having a boost in 3D and IMAX tickets. The fact that Abrams himself regards the marketing strategy in hiding Khan as mistake should tell you something. STID was not a failure, but it's box office run isn't as impressive as other successful franchises and might not be enough for Paramount to want to put out so much money. That's also why there's talks of budgets being lower for the follow up film, because they realize it's not going to make the kind of profit that other franchises like PIRATES, TRANSFORMERS, THE DARK KNIGHT, MARVEL, ect makes.

Would revealing Khan from the get go have changed things? Perhaps, but we'll never really know. Still, it's clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity.
MakeshiftPython is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 10:15 AM   #25
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

MakeshiftPython wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
After looking over the box office returns again, I can't really see any reasonable way to regard decisions on how STID was marketed as mistakes, if by a "mistake" one means something that hurt the bottom line. If STID had been a failure or only a marginal success, then second-guessing or Monday morning quarterbacking the marketing campaign might be in order. But given that STID was a success, how one could validly argue that the returns would have been better, if only someone in marketing had done thus and so, is really a mystery to me.
Likely because as good as STID did, it didn't do as well as many expected it to as a follow up. It did less domestically than the 2009 film, despite having a boost in 3D and IMAX tickets. The fact that Abrams himself regards the marketing strategy in hiding Khan as mistake should tell you something. STID was not a failure, but it's box office run isn't as impressive as other successful franchises and might not be enough for Paramount to want to put out so much money. That's also why there's talks of budgets being lower for the follow up film, because they realize it's not going to make the kind of profit that other franchises like PIRATES, TRANSFORMERS, THE DARK KNIGHT, MARVEL, ect makes.

Would revealing Khan from the get go have changed things? Perhaps, but we'll never really know. Still, it's clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity.
Nah.

"Clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity" by a vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans, perhaps. In a more general way, I don't think so.

I can find no suggestion that Paramount considers it a "lost opportunity." As a matter of fact, in the interview JJ calls it their idea!

Word got out in plenty of time that it was Khan, for that to influence who was going to see it, anyway. The only reason JJ's apologizing is for lying to the hardcore base in the buildup (by denying it was Khan). He pretty much says that. Don't tell me that some of the hardcore fans are mad at themselves for believing him on that account? I didn't! I wasn't as sure it was going to be Khan as a few of the other people on the board were, but boy was it clear that some were really sure it would be Khan all along!

As for the budget for STXIII, there's a whole thread for that. Word is that it's "being lowered" because they can get the same bang outside of the Hollywood area for a smaller buck than they could inside it. That sounds a great way not to waste money. I really doubt that decision will affect the quality of the movie one way or another.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 10:38 AM   #26
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
"Clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity" by a vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans, perhaps. In a more general way, I don't think so.
Abrams seems to think so, hence referring to the way it was handled as a "mistake". That's from the horse's mouth, not just some vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans. I agree with him. Had they been clear it was Khan from the get go, there would have been more hype and publicity over the fact that Benedict Cumberbatch was going to play an iconic villain such as Khan, certainly more than "Cumberbatch will play some guy named John Harrison who terrorizes Starfleet and such". Best case scenario, many folks unfamiliar with Khan would actually be interested in checking out the two stories with Khan, and even better, like them enough to really look forward to the next Trek. Isn't that what all fans want, for everyone to enjoy this franchise we all love?
MakeshiftPython is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 10:54 AM   #27
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

MakeshiftPython wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
"Clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity" by a vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans, perhaps. In a more general way, I don't think so.
Abrams seems to think so, hence referring to the way it was handled as a "mistake". That's from the horse's mouth, not just some vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans. I agree with him. Had they been clear it was Khan from the get go, there would have been more hype and publicity over the fact that Benedict Cumberbatch was going to play an iconic villain such as Khan, certainly more than "Cumberbatch will play some guy named John Harrison who terrorizes Starfleet and such". Best case scenario, many folks unfamiliar with Khan would actually be interested in checking out the two stories with Khan, and even better, like them enough to really look forward to the next Trek. Isn't that what all fans want, for everyone to enjoy this franchise we all love?
That's not what Abrams said, though.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 11:06 AM   #28
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

Sure, I can bet you anything that it is on his mind. He's a Hollywood producer, he knows Trek is a cash cow, that there's potential profit, and would be a fool to think otherwise. Paramount certainly is.
MakeshiftPython is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 11:26 AM   #29
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

MakeshiftPython wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
"Clearly acknowledged now as a lost opportunity" by a vocal minority of self-described hardcore Star Trek fans, perhaps. In a more general way, I don't think so.
Abrams seems to think so, hence referring to the way it was handled as a "mistake". That's from the horse's mouth
MakeshiftPython wrote: View Post
Sure, I can bet you anything that it is on his mind. He's a Hollywood producer, he knows Trek is a cash cow, that there's potential profit, and would be a fool to think otherwise. Paramount certainly is.
So, which is it, from the horse's mouth, or that you can bet me anything that it is on his mind?

All I can see, reading between the lines, is that JJ regrets his alienation with a certain part of the hardcore fanbase. Maybe you can point me to where he talks about a "lost opportunity" or says that not revealing Khan earlier cost them domestic market share.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3 2013, 11:40 AM   #30
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

Both. Why would he be so concerned enough to regard it as a mistake because of alienating a certain part of the hardcore fanbase? You'd only regard it as such if it had to do with the big picture. Either way, I'll give him points for acknowledging the choice as a mistake, whether it was his call or Paramount's, they're all guilty of it.
MakeshiftPython is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.